Definitely there is similar stuff in Qt's Net module. The point of POCO is high quality implementation and focus on network centric apps. I am not going to make advertisement here on poco. Back in time I have had experience with Qt and ACE framework and very important point was the integration between ACE's event loop and Qt's one in the form of ACEQtReactor. the benefit for poco lib would be wider coverage of network development domain, but any way this benefit is not crucial. At the moment of asking the community regarding poco's feedback i did not have the answer my self- it is always best to hear community. Regarding quality of implementation I do not have doubts-it is high quality (any way finally it sounds like an advertisement ;) and it is gathering momentum and recognition now.
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]> wrote: > On 3/8/2010 1:31, Mr. Todorov Todor wrote: >> >> Hi, >> does somebody has experience on deployin POCO (C++ libraries >> http://pocoproject.org/ ) on MeeGo. >> Or generally what is your oppinion on making this library available on >> MeeGo? >> Todor > > the "should this library be included" question usually has 3 components > > 1) Is something relevant actually going to use it for some useful > functionality? > (without a "yes" to that it usually is an irrelevant library) > 2) Does it overlap with something that we already have? > (if there's overlap, extending what is already there may well be the > better solution) > 3) How is the quality/maintenance/etc? > (if the code is full of security holes, or the upstream project is mostly > dead, then it's probably not a good idea) > _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
